The structural profiles are close, with Dassault Systèmes SE carrying a narrow edge on stability. Teledyne Technologies still leads on growth and stability, which keeps the comparison from looking entirely one-sided. In the market, Teledyne Technologies carries the stronger setup — intact trend against Dassault Systèmes SE's broken trend. That leaves a split case: the structural lead stays with Dassault Systèmes SE, but the market is not currently confirming it.
The comparison is based on similar long-term financial trajectories, not sector labels.
Stability points more clearly toward Teledyne Technologies Incorporated, even if the broader score still leans toward Dassault Systèmes SE.
These two companies are linked by measured long-term financial trajectory similarity within the selected peer universe.
A solid similarity means the pair shares a clearly comparable long-term financial profile, even if individual dimensions still differ.
Most of the shared profile comes through margin consistency and investment intensity.
Scores reflect position relative to comparable companies with similar long-term financial trajectories.
The clearest separation appears in stability.
Left means cheaper relative valuation. Higher means stronger structure.
The price setup looks more supportive for Teledyne Technologies Incorporated, but Dassault Systèmes SE still has the stronger structure.
Valuation position uses peer-relative PE percentile (idx_pct_pe) where available.
The stability gap is wide, with the stronger side looking materially steadier through time.
Earnings growth also leans the other way, which keeps the score lead from reading as a full growth sweep.
Stability is the clearest driver of the lead, with profitability adding further support — though growth still provides a real counterweight.
Break down the DSY.PA vs TDY comparison across all dimensions with the full interactive tool.
Explore how DSY.PA and TDY each compare against other companies in their peer groups.
Rule-based, descriptive analysis only. Derived from peer percentile dimensions. Not investment advice. Peer groups are determined algorithmically based on structural similarity — not by sector classification alone.
AssetNext scores reflect each company's structural position within its functional peer group — not a ranking against all stocks simultaneously. Peers are identified by similarity across eight financial dimensions, including revenue growth trajectory, margin structure, capital intensity, and earnings stability. A score of 75 means the company ranks in the top quartile within its own peer group, not the entire market.
Four dimension scores drive the overall peer score: Growth (revenue trajectory and expansion dynamics), Quality (margin structure and capital efficiency), Valuation (peer-relative pricing on standard multiples), and Stability (earnings consistency and financial predictability). Each dimension is scored 0–100 relative to the peer group, then combined into an overall peer score using equal weighting.
Scores are recalculated periodically as underlying financial data is updated. All analysis is descriptive and rule-based — AssetNext describes structural realities and never issues buy, sell or hold recommendations.